It seems that all you need to do is mention Web 2.0 these days, and you’ll fly to the top of Digg. Ok, not quite, but the ultra-geek tech bias of â€œsocialâ€ networks like Digg reveals a flaw in the plan – you’ll mostly end up with geeks talking geek stuff.
Back to my point: For a business idea to work, a market must be identified, then a plan formulated about how to meet the needs of that market.
This article “Top Ten Underserved Web 2.0 Markets” hints at the problem with a lot of Web 2.0 thinking, which is – what markets are underserved by Web 2.0 applications?
To me, that thinking is the wrong way round. The real question is: “what market needs this software application?”.
If a developer creates a Web 2.0 app – whatever that means – s/he may enter an uncrowded market in the sense that “there are no Web 2.0 apps in this market space”, but if the app doesn’t solve a problem, then the software is redundant, no matter if the software is Web 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, Dos, Windows, Open Source, or anything else.
Rather obvious, eh.
Software is primarily about solving problems, and successful software is software that solves problems that a lot of people have. If it doesn’t, then it’s just a bunch of glossy features, signifying nothing.